Don't know what the Across the Spectrum series is? click here to read the intro: https://www.vizzed.com/vizzedboard/thread.php?id=18407

I said I was going to do this every Sunday, but I have been busy. Here we go, the first debate topic.

THE INERRANCY DEBATE
What all evangelicals agree on:
One of the core distinctives of evangelical Christianity is the conviction that the Bible is the inspired Word of God. (2 Timothy 3:16-17;2 Peter 1:20-21). They affirm that the Bible, and the Bible alone, is inspired by God and is the final authority on matters of faith and practice. This differs with those outside of evangelicalism who believe that the Bible may be "inspiring" but not "inspired by God" or "God-breathed." They also do not believe that the Bible is unique in this case. The debate that lies with in evangelicalism is whether the Bible is inerrant in all aspects of life or only infallible for things of faith and practice.

The Inerrantist View
The view that the Bible is not simply without error in matters of faith and practice, but also on all matters it addresses, including science and history (if its meaning is properly understood). A few qualifications: 1. Inerrantist do not say that the Bible don't have apparent errors, but it has no real errors. 2. Inerrancy theory applies only to the original manuscripts, not to the later copies of the manuscripts. 3. It only applies to the author's original intent, not our interpretation of scripture.

Supporting arguments:
1. Logical argument: God is perfect and cannot err or lie. scripture is God-breathed. What God breathes retain His perfect nature. scripture cannot err.
2. Jesus trusted the scriptures. "scripture says" and "God says" were used interchangeably. He affirms it in (Matt. 5:18; Luke 16:17; and John 10:35) He even claims that someone does not have truth because they do not read or understand scripture well enough.
3. New testament arguments go to the smallest details of scripture. Jesus based an entire argument on the word "God" in Psalms (John 10:34-36; Psalm 82:6). Paul based his entire argument from the singular form of one word in Genesis. (Galatians 3:16;Genesis 13:16)
4. Epistemology argument. We don't want to place our authority over the Bible. Not accepting the Bible's inerrancy would place our decision to be a higher authority than the Bible. If our faith is not on a solid foundation, everything is up for grabs.
5. Church History. Martin Luther, Calvin, Augustine, etc affirm that "scripture cannot err"
6. Historical argument. Everything that the Bible talks about Man's nature is shown through history. The Bible also follow through history and is evident through archeology.
7. Bible and Speech act theory. Language not only describes, but also does things. The Bible is a vehicle, not just for stating truths, but also for creating spiritual growth and connection. It has both informational assertions and formative utterances.

The Infallibilist View
The view that the Bible can and should be trusted as unfailing in all matters that pertain to Christian faith and living. It cannot be considered inerrant, however, especially in regard to minor matters of history or science.

Supporting arguments:
1. Thoroughly inspired and thoroughly human. Writers presupposed a premodern world. Premodern thought, and minor details contradict.
2. Evidence of confidence in Bible has been on faith issues
3. Church history. Going back to the time of Augustine, there have been disputes of whether the Bible should be used to settle scientific disputes.
4. Apologetics advantage. Inerrantist view is harder to keep new believers.
5. Danger of committing Bibliolatry. Committing idolatry on the Bible.


What do you think? Debate with both reason and through scripture.

Based on p.15-31 of the book